Philosophy, Sophistry, Antiphilosophy: Badiou's Dispute with Lyotard

by Matthew R. McLennan

Overview

Alain Badiou's work in philosophy, though daunting, has gained a receptive and steadily growing Anglophone readership. What is not well known is the extent to which Badiou's positions, vis-à-vis ontology, ethics, politics and the very meaning of philosophy, were hammered out in dispute with the late Jean-François Lyotard. Matthew R. McLennan's Philosophy, Sophistry, Antiphilosophy is the first work to pose the question of the relation between Lyotard and Badiou, and in so doing constitutes a significant intervention in the field of contemporary European philosophy by revisiting one of its most influential and controversial forefathers.

Badiou himself has underscored the importance of Lyotard for his own project; might the recent resurgence of interest in Lyotard be tied in some way to Badiou's comments? Or deeper still: might not Badiou's philosophical Platonism beg an encounter with philosophy's other, the figure of the sophist that Lyotard played so often and so ably? Posing pertinent questions and opening new discursive channels in the literature on these two major figures this book is of interest to those studying philosophy, rhetoric, literary theory, cultural and media studies.

Product Details

ISBN-13:	9781472574176
Publisher:	Bloomsbury Publishing
Publication date:	10/22/2015
Series:	Bloomsbury Studies in Continental Philosophy
Sold by:	Barnes & Noble
Format:	eBook
Pages:	160
File size:	509 KB

About the Author

Matthew R. McLennan is Assistant Professor of Philosophy and Public Ethics at Saint Paul University in Ottawa, Canada.
Matthew R. McLennan is Associate Professor in the School of Ethics, Social Justice and Public Service, Saint Paul University / Université Saint-Paul, Canada

Table of Contents

Introduction
Philosophy's Present
Old Battle Lines Redrawn
A Note on Method and Sources

Chapter 1: The Thinking of Being
Lyotard's Thinking of Being
Badiou's Thinking of Being

Chapter 2: Philosophy in its Relation to Being
Lyotard's Metaphilosophy
Badiou's Critique of The Differend

Chapter 3: Demarcations: Philosophy, Sophistry, Antiphilosophy
Lyotard, sophiste?
Badiou, philosophe
Lyotard, antiphilosphe?

Chapter 4: Ethics and Politics
Philosophy as Ethical and Political Vocation: Lyotard
Philosophy as Ethical and Political Vocation: Badiou
A Desire for the One

Conclusion

Editorial Reviews

They say too many books are written. I'm not so sure. So long as a book is read by someone at some time. Even if it is not read, like a redemptive private diary which never goes beyond a locked drawer, the process of writing can be enough. I am sure that some books need to be written. … This book was necessary. It is the first book on the encounters, disputes, agreements and commentaries bringing Jean-François Lyotard and Alain Badiou together. … A thorough and accurate resource.”– James Williams, Deakin University, USA, Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews

“The 'philosopher' vs. the 'sophist' — the Badiou vs. Lyotard dispute — is the fight over the meaning of philosophy and so the struggle for its existence. McLennan lucidly explicates the crucial arguments between these two thinkers, in view of the ultimate question: whose thinking is better suited to sustain the philosophical desire, philosophy as resistance? Positioned by anti-philosophy, the answer McLennan proposes is true, post-correlationist elegance.” —Michael J Kelly, Visiting Professor, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

“This work is to be commended for its insistence on a certain “philosophical militancy.” It ranges over questions of being, ethics, politics, and the very status of philosophy itself in the works of two important contemporary thinkers, neither of whom have always been read in strictly philosophical terms. In taking on a critical interchange that until now has been little known to English readers, it starts thinking down an as yet largely untrodden path: this book offers the first strident steps.” —Peter W. Milne, Assistant Professor, Department of Aesthetics, Seoul National University, South Korea

“This book traces the argumentative dispute between Alain Badiou and Jean-Francois Lyotard, two of the most radical and influential thinkers of recent times. In its remarkable staging of this dispute it is both a model of scholarly exegesis and a challenging engagement with the fate of philosophy today. In this sense, it is a fitting tribute to the profound and provocative thought of both philosophers. I recommend it to those interested in the work of either Badiou or Lyotard, and to anyone who cares about the challenge of philosophy to our contemporary complacencies.” —Keith Crome, Senior Lecturer, Department of History, Politics and Philosophy, Manchester Metropolitan University, UK

From the Publisher

This book traces the argumentative dispute between Alain Badiou and Jean-Francois Lyotard, two of the most radical and influential thinkers of recent times. In its remarkable staging of this dispute it is both a model of scholarly exegesis and a challenging engagement with the fate of philosophy today. In this sense, it is a fitting tribute to the profound and provocative thought of both philosophers. I recommend it to those interested in the work of either Badiou or Lyotard, and to anyone who cares about the challenge of philosophy to our contemporary complacencies.

Keith Crome

This work is to be commended for its insistence on a certain "philosophical militancy." It ranges over questions of being, ethics, politics, and the very status of philosophy itself in the works of two important contemporary thinkers, neither of whom have always been read in strictly philosophical terms. In taking on a critical interchange that until now has been little known to English readers, it starts thinking down an as yet largely untrodden path: this book offers the first strident steps.

Peter W. Milne

The 'philosopher' vs. the 'sophist' -- the Badiou vs. Lyotard dispute -- is the fight over the meaning of philosophy and so the struggle for its existence. McLennan lucidly explicates the crucial arguments between these two thinkers, in view of the ultimate question: whose thinking is better suited to sustain the philosophical desire, philosophy as resistance? Positioned by anti-philosophy, the answer McLennan proposes is true, post-correlationist elegance.

Michael J Kelly